About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3
for a few hours and to institute special targeting rules both in the air environment and at the canadian border environment in case there were those seeking to escape the scene. with respect to fema, i can, when saw the response in boston and a coordinated it was, even given the level of destruction, i would remind the committee that just last november, boston held a massive exercise on how to deal with a mass casualty event. and that exercise was the kind of exercise and exercise is supported by the committee through fema to local areas, and again increasing our ability for response and resilience. we have worked with the fbi and ietotate lct ross e critical infrarurs d oprators, and we've been reaching out to faith-based organizations, community organizations and others who want to know what they can do. we are implementing a number of security measures, both seen and unseen at airports, transit hubs within the maritime environment, and at ports of entry. the coast guard is provided security on the ferries in the boston area. viper teams are doing searches on terms of ground transporta
environment, we are warriors as opposed to common criminals who should be should be investigated and based on that investigation prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? many people have made grandiose claims about wanting to be in a war. how that ends up getting decided is based on facts on the ground. it is based on law and facts not on suppositions or on the grandiose claims of people who would like to be bigger than they are. >> host: him ma shamsi with the aclu, american civil libertis. and cliff may, foundation for defense of democracies. he writes a weekly column distributed by scripps howard news service and contributes to nationalreview.online, townhall.com among other publications a lot of folks want to talk to you. let's get back to the lines. charles, wood bridge, virginia, republican, go ahead. >> caller: thanks. you know i am a republican and i am an american obviously and i, my stance is that, i believe -- [inaudible] >> host: charles, we're losing you right as we get. >> caller: i'm sorry. >> host: say it again? >> caller: thank you, i'm sorry. i believe that the admini
's something that would have to be part of an agreement and acceptable to republicans in this environment, it is something we can defend on a technical basis. it's more accurate and because for middle class people, you know, it's a burden that is relatively small. the most vulnerable even $10 a month for the most vulnerable is a big deal. if you live to be 90 years old and all you have is the social security, that $10 can be the difference between food in the last couple of days of the month. so i think we have to distinguish between what impact going a more correct measure would have. and we have, you know, put in a way that we think is fair. by saying that the most vulnerable have the benefit go up. not because we have the overall adjustment being faster. we will make the decision to go in and make sure they're not hurt. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for appearing. i have four sets of questions i'm going run through quickly. supplementally. first thing has to do with the crap i look at the budget. how it's crurkted. because the choice of the underpinnings of the a
Search Results 0 to 2 of about 3

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)